Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 2008 / Notices 10465 

BURDEN BREAKDOWN—Continued 

Citation 30 CFR 250 

Subpart I and related NTLs Reporting and/or recordkeeping requirement 

Fee(s) 

Hour burden Average No. of 

annual reponses 

Annual burden 

hours 

919(b) ................................... Submit annual (November 1 of each year) report on inspection of platforms or floating production facilities, 

including summary of testing results.

80 130 lessees ........... 10,400 

Subtotal ......................... ........................................................................................... ........................ 260 ......................... 16,900 

General Departure 

900 thru 921 ......................... General departure and alternative compliance requests 

not specifically covered elsewhere in Subpart I regulations.

10 10 requests ............ 100 

Subtotal ......................... ........................................................................................... ........................ 791 Responses ..... 60,260 

$926,150 Fees 

* The records required to be retained are such that respondents would keep them as usual and customary business practice. The burden 

would be to make them available to MMS for review. 

Estimated Reporting and 

Recordkeeping ‘‘Non-Hour Cost’’

Burden: We have identified four nonhour cost burdens (see Burden 

Breakdown). Section 250.905(k) requires 

four specific fees for various platform 

applications/installations. One fee is for 

installation under the Platform 

Verification Program; one fee is for 

installation of fixed structures under the 

Platform Approval Program; one fee is 

for installation of Caisson/Well 

Protectors; and one fee is for 

modifications and/or repairs. We have 

not identified any other ‘‘non-hour cost’’

burdens associated with this collection 

of information. 

Public Disclosure Statement: The PRA 

(44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) provides that an 

agency may not conduct or sponsor a 

collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number. Until OMB approves a 

collection of information, you are not 

obligated to respond. 

Comments: Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of 

the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) 

requires each agency ‘‘* * * to provide 

notice * * * and otherwise consult 

with members of the public and affected 

agencies concerning each proposed 

collection of information * * *’’

Agencies must specifically solicit 

comments to: (a) Evaluate whether the 

proposed collection of information is 

necessary for the agency to perform its 

duties, including whether the 

information is useful; (b) evaluate the 

accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the 

burden of the proposed collection of 

information; (c) enhance the quality, 

usefulness, and clarity of the 

information to be collected; and (d) 

minimize the burden on the 

respondents, including the use of 

automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

To comply with the public 

consultation process, on June 25, 2007, 

we published a Federal Register notice 

(72 FR 34717) announcing that we 

would submit this ICR to OMB for 

approval. The notice provided the 

required 60-day comment period. In 

addition, § 250.199 provides the OMB 

control number for the information 

collection requirements imposed by the 

30 CFR 250 regulations and forms. The 

regulation also informs the public that 

they may comment at any time on the 

collections of information and provides 

the address to which they should send 

comments. We have received no 

comments in response to these efforts. 

If you wish to comment in response 

to this notice, you may send your 

comments to the offices listed under the 

ADDRESSES section of this notice. The 

OMB has up to 60 days to approve or 

disapprove the information collection 

but may respond after 30 days. 

Therefore, to ensure maximum 

consideration, OMB should receive 

public comments by March 28, 2008. 

Public Availability of Comments: 

Before including your address, phone 

number, email address, or other 

personal identifying information in your 

comment, you should be aware that 

your entire comment—including your 

personal identifying information—may 

be made publicly available at any time. 

While you can ask us in your comment 

to withhold your personal identifying 

information from public review, we 

cannot guarantee that we will be able to 

do so. 

MMS Information Collection 

Clearance Officer: Arlene Bajusz, (202) 

208–7744. 

Dated: December 20, 2007. 

E.P. Danenberger, 

Chief, Office of Offshore Regulatory Programs. 

[FR Doc. E8–3654 Filed 2–26–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

National Park Service 

Stehekin River Corridor 

Implementation Plan: North Cascades 

National Park Service Complex, Lake 

Chelan National Recreation Area, 

Chelan County, WA; Notice of Intent To 

Prepare an Enviornmental Impact 

Statement 

Summary: In accord with § 102(2)(C) 

of the National Environmental Policy 

Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321, et seq.) and 

the Council on Environmental Quality 

regulations (40 CFR parts 1500–1508), 

the National Park Service (in 

cooperation with the Western Federal 

Lands Division of Federal Highway 

Administration) is undertaking a 

conservation planning and 

environmental impact analysis process 

to determine future management of 

public and inter-mingled private lands 

in the lower Stehekin River Valley 

within Lake Chelan National Recreation 

Area. An Environmental Impact 

Statement (EIS) will be prepared for a 

Stehekin River Corridor Implementation 

Plan, in conjunction with revising the 

current Land Protection Plan, which 

will guide land protection and Stehekin 

River management within Lake Chelan 

NRA. 

Background: The National Park 

Service (NPS) collectively manages 

North Cascades National Park, Lake 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
10466 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 2008 / Notices 

Chelan NRA, and Ross Lake National 

Recreation Area as North Cascades 

National Park Service Complex (North 

Cascades). The Stehekin Valley is a 

glacial valley that begins at the crest of 

Cascade Pass within North Cascades 

National Park and ends where the river 

flows into Lake Chelan, the third 

deepest natural lake in the United 

States. Lake Chelan is a 55-mile-long, 

1,500-foot-deep lake with exceptionally 

steep valley walls reminiscent of a fjord. 

The natural level of the lake was raised 

21 feet by a hydroelectric/flood-control 

dam in the 1920s. Approximately the 

upper five miles of Lake Chelan and the 

lower nine miles of the Stehekin River 

are within Lake Chelan NRA. 

Geographically this remote area is a 

long, narrow corridor, within which 

numerous private homes and public 

facilities are located. People have been 

living in the Stehekin area since the 

valley was homesteaded in the mid1800s. Approximately 100 people live 

in the Stehekin Community year-round, 

while many others visit periodically, 

most in summer. In addition, the 

Stehekin area draws visitors from 

around the world to camp, fish, swim, 

raft, kayak, bicycle, hike and engage in 

other activities. Some stay for only a few 

hours (between ferry landings), while 

some stay for days or weeks hosted by 

the park and the Stehekin Community. 

Prior to the late 20th century, like 

most rivers on the east slope of the 

Cascade Range, the Stehekin River had 

flooded primarily due to spring 

snowmelt. Since the 1960s, however, 

flooding appears to have become more 

likely during fall rain-on-snow events, 

which rise quickly and occur from midOctober through December. The 

unprecedented occurrence of several 

100-year fall floods and one 500-year 

flood since 1995 has substantially 

altered the river channel and floodplain, 

resulting in channel migration, erosion 

of river banks, and flooding in some 

areas during even relatively low flood 

conditions. As a result, private 

landowners and NPS facilities in the 

lower Valley have repeately been 

threatened or damaged by recent 

flooding. Since the 1960s, the number of 

river channelization and bank 

stabilization structures has increased to 

some 1.5 miles at 41 sites. 

Purpose and Need: The three largest 

recorded floods on the Stehekin River 

have occurred within the past 12 

years—in 1995, 2003, and 2006. Prior to 

this, the last large flood of similar 

magnitude occurred in 1948. Because of 

ongoing impacts to federal lands and 

private property from the increased 

magnitude and frequency of flooding, 

sustainable management strategies and 

actions are needed to fulfill the intent of 

the 1995 Lake Chelan NRA General 

Management Plan (GMP) to allow for 

natural processes associated with the 

Stehekin River to occur, to maintain 

park facilities (including the road 

system, nearby campgrounds, and 

administrative areas), and to help 

ensure the sustainability of visitor 

services provided by the Stehekin 

community. 

Some of these management strategies 

and actions were identified by the Lake 

Chelan GMP. Among other actions, the 

GMP called for the relocation of park 

facilities out of the floodplain. The GMP 

and accompanying 1995 Lake Chelan 

Land Protection Plan (LPP) also called 

for the continued purchase and/or 

exchange of private lands within the 

floodplain. Although tiered to the GMP, 

this Stehekin River Corridor 

Impementation Plan would provide 

more detailed management guidance. As 

a result, this implementation plan will 

identify additional sustainable 

management strategies and actions 

related to or clarified from the Lake 

Chelan GMP and will review and refine 

existing management strategies and 

actions based on continuing research 

applicable to river management 

practices. This conservation planning 

and environmental impact analysis 

process is also intended to update the 

LPP. 

Changes in the origin, magnitude, and 

frequency of floods have led to a shift 

in floodplain boundaries, and a 

recurring threat to public and private 

facilities. It is possible that the Stehekin 

River system may be evolving from a 

spring snowmelt dominated system to 

one dominated by bigger, more frequent 

fall rain-on-snow floods. Because of 

channel changes associated with the 

three most recent large floods, smaller 

floods now inundate areas that were not 

within the 100-year floodplain prior to 

1995. Other areas that were within the 

floodplain have now become part of the 

active river channel. These changing 

hydrological conditions and the rapid 

accumulation of large woody debris and 

flood-deposited sediment along the 

Stehekin River have led to a landscape 

that requires management changes not 

envisioned by previous plans or treated 

holistically in actions on federal lands 

or private property to date. This 

implementation plan will identify the 

most effective and sustainable strategies 

and actions for future management of 

the Stehekin River corridor based upon 

the laws, regulations and policies that 

guide the administration of NPS lands. 

Preliminary Issues: NPS personnel, 

interagency staff, and area residents 

have begun to internally evaluate the 

state of knowledge about the Stehekin 

River and to review past management 

actions to identify a variety of 

preliminary issues and potential future 

management actions. The following 

issues and actions constitute a starting 

point for engaging the public in the 

conservation planning process: 

Comprehensive analysis of the 

sustainability of public and 

administrative roads within the Lower 

Stehekin Valley: Because of channel 

changes associated with the three most 

recent large floods, public and 

administrative roads in several locations 

now become inundated during smaller 

flood events and bank erosion threatens 

road networks at additional sites, 

cutting off access. There is a need for a 

comprehensive analysis of what steps 

would be needed to maintain the public 

and administrative road system, 

including identifying possible reroute 

locations out of the floodplain and the 

associated environmental effect. The 

analysis of any reroutes will need to 

include potential effects on federal or 

state listed species. 

Possible relocation or modification of 

recreational and administrative 

facilities within the Lower Stehekin 

Valley: Changes in the river have caused 

significant shifts in floodplain 

boundaries for the 100-year flood. 

Development areas which did not flood 

before 2003 now flood frequently, 

placing some recreational and 

administrative sites and facilities in the 

Lower Stehekin Valley at risk. Among 

the affected facilities are the group 

campsites at Harlequin Campground 

and several formerly private cabins that 

have been destroyed by flooding, yet 

remain as dilapidated structures or 

debris piles along the river, diminishing 

scenic qualities. 

Updating the Lake Chelan Land 

Protection Plan: The Land Protection 

Plan was designed in large part to 

protect the river corridor from 

development. Since the Land Protection 

Plan was approved in 1995, the NPS has 

exchanged several parcels of land. An 

update is needed to determine how 

previous land protection priorities 

would be modified by new information 

associated with preliminary changes to 

floodplain mapping and by lands 

acquired since the plan was developed. 

The update would likely include 

refining criteria used to evaluate land 

purchases and exchanges and 

acquisition priorities. 

Providing guidance for future river 

bank and flood protection measures in 

the Lower Stehekin Valley, including 

management of large, woody debris and 

restoration of riparian areas: Despite 

erosion and flood protection efforts by 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 2008 / Notices 10467 

the NPS and private landowners, bank 

erosion continues to threaten public and 

private property. Channel changes 

associated with the floods have placed 

more pressure on some sites, while 

decreasing erosion rates at others. As 

certain channel reaches fill with gravel, 

large logjams have formed at side 

channel openings. Large wood affects 

flooding issues and recreational use of 

the river. Future actions if inappropriate 

could impact federal and state listed 

species or/and increase the spread of 

non-native plans. 

While recent changes in flooding and 

erosion are occurring throughout the 

lower Stehekin River Valley, two key 

points in the valley that have undergone 

major changes are the river mouth and 

McGregor Meadows: At the valley 

mouth, the changing level of Lake 

Chelan influences the gradient and 

velocity of the river as far as a 1⁄4 mile 

upstream. The slowing of the river in 

turn triggers deposition of sediment and 

large woody debris. At McGregor 

Meadows, the valley widens three-fold, 

triggering a loss in river gradient, the 

deposition of massive amounts of 

gravel, and the accumulation of large log 

jams. These changes in the river system 

lead to impacts to roads, visitor 

facilities, and private property. 

Response has been on an event-by-event 

basis. The resulting outcomes as well as 

public understanding gained over the 

last 10 years underscores the need for 

developing comprehensive, sustainable 

guidance for future bank erosion and 

flood protection measures, including 

management of large, woody debris and 

restoration of riparian areas. 

NPS personnel, interagency staff, and 

Stehekin landowners have begun to 

identify preliminary components of a 

comprehensive implementation plan. 

Possible management actions may 

include combinations of the following 

(or other feasible actions as may be 

identified by the public during the 

scoping phase): 

Continue current management 

practices, such as reacting to periodic 

flooding by installing bank erosion 

protection devices or relocating the 

Stehekin Valley Road on a case-by-case 

basis; considering requests from private 

landowners regarding appropriate 

actions to take so as to avoid 

consequences of flooding, including 

elevating their homes; responding to 

private property owners as they seek 

permission to take action on NPS land 

to protect adjacent private property; 

continue to evaluate the suitability of 

lands for exchange as requests for 

exchanges are made or as the NPS 

acquires new land; continue research to 

determine the efficacy of long-term bank 

stabilization (erosion protection) 

measures. 

In addition to maintaining some 

current management activities, new 

practices which may be evaluated 

include: 

• Use new floodplain mapping to 

identify new threats to private and 

public structures and to identify what 

lands can be managed sustainably under 

existing conditions (with structures or 

facilities); 

• Update land exchange criteria/ 

priorities to reinvigorate land exchange 

process; 

• Analyze the amount and movement 

of large woody debris to determine if 

management changes are needed 

(potentially refining GMP direction to 

allow for limited manipulation of large 

woody debris in an effort to protect 

certain areas from large flood damage); 

• Relocate parts of private and public 

roads, campgrounds, or campsites from 

the floodplain; 

• Work with landowners to remove 

private facilities from the floodplain; 

• Remove derelict structures, debris 

piles, or non-native plants from 

floodplain; 

• Encourage moving or reconstructing 

private homes outside of the floodplain; 

• Restore native riparian edge near 

Buckner Orchard to slow erosion rate; 

and 

• Accept some facilities in floodplain. 

Scoping Process: As a key step in the 

overall conservation planning and 

environmental impact analysis process 

necessary for achieving the goal of 

partnering to implement coordinated 

Stehekin River management, the NPS is 

seeking public comments and relevant 

information to guide the preparation of 

a Draft EIS. The objectives of the public 

scoping phase include: (1) Invite 

participation from federal, tribal, state, 

local governments and other interested 

parties; (2) Inform all interested parties 

about the scope of the problem and the 

need to find solutions; (3) Identify a 

preliminary range of management 

alternatives (in addition to a no-action 

alternative that will be used as a 

baseline of existing conditions from 

which to evaluate proposed changes in 

management); (4) Identify relevant 

natural and cultural resources, 

recreational uses, socioeconomic and 

other issues which warrant detailed 

environmental impact analysis, and 

eliminate issues or topics which do not 

require analysis; (5) Identify potential 

environmental consequences and 

suitable mitigation strategies. 

Any parties wishing to express 

concerns about management issues or 

provide relevant environmental 

information that should be addressed in 

preparing the forthcoming EIS are 

strongly encouraged to submit written 

comments. Before including your 

address, phone number, e-mail address, 

or other personal identifying 

information in your comment, you 

should be aware that your entire 

comment—including your personal 

identifying information—may be made 

publicly available at any time. While 

you can ask us in your comment to 

withhold your personal identifying 

information, we cannot guarantee that 

we will be able to do so. All written 

comments must be postmarked or 

transmitted not later than March 31, 

2008. Written comments should be 

mailed to North Cascades National Park 

Service Complex, Attn: SRCIP–EIS, 810 

State Route 20, Sedro-Woolley, WA 

98284 (or e-mailed to 

NOCA_planning@nps.gov—please 

include ‘‘Stehekin River Corridor 

Implementation Plan’’ in the subject 

header). Comments may also be 

submitted via the NPS Planning 

Environment & Public Comment Web 

site at www.parkplanning.nps.gov/ 

NOCA. 

Several public scoping workshops are 

anticipated to be held, including 

February 25 (Concrete), February 26 

(Sedro-Woolley), March 4 (Bellingham), 

and March 5 (Seattle). Details regarding 

the workshops including times and 

meeting locations will be announced 

widely through local and regional news 

media, direct park mailings, and posted 

on the park’s Web site at www.nps.gov/ 

noca. 

Decision Process: At this time, the 

Draft EIS is expected to be available for 

public review in spring 2009. Formal 

announcement of its availability will be 

published in the Federal Register, and 

through local and regional news media, 

as well as distribution to public 

libraries. Following due consideration 

of all comments as may be received, a 

Final EIS will be prepared. As a 

delegated EIS, the official responsible 

for a final decision is the Regional 

Director, Pacific West Region. 

Subsequently the official responsible for 

implementing the approved plan and for 

monitoring results is the 

Superintendent, North Cascades 

National Park Service Complex. 

Dated: December 18, 2007. 

Jonathan B. Jarvis, 

Regional Director, Pacific West Region. 

[FR Doc. 08–841 Filed 2–26–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–T6–M 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES